Death at a Funeral Trailer

"Tea Can Do Many Things, But It Can't Bring Back the Dead"

By Dustin Rowles | Posted Under Trailers | Comments (28)

I know several of y’all who saw it thought highly of 2007’s British farce Death at a Funeral, though I suspect that the presence of Alan Tudyk clouded the judgment of many of you. It was a semi-decent film, but even for what it was, I thought it was a bit on the overrated side. (Having recently watched “Spooks,” however, the casting of Matthew Macfadyen and Keeley Hawes as a couple has a certain retroactive appeal).

No matter: Even a semi-decent film will get remade in Hollywood, here starring Chris Rock, Martin Lawrence, Luke Wilson, Columbus Short, James Marsden (in the Tudyk role), Tracy Morgan, and Zoe Saldana. Even Peter Dinklage returns from the original movie to play the exact same part. In fact, the trailer looks like nearly the exact same movie, only with African-American actors, a few terrible reaction shots from Martin Lawrence, and the occasional “Dayummmm.” Stranger still is that Neil Labute — the whitest man on the planet — directed the movie.

It’s a head-scratcher, folks. I guess Labute got tired of making films no one ever saw, so decided to remake a British film with a mostly black cast. Trouble is, no one watches Chris Rock and Martin Lawrence films anymore, either, which is to say: Good luck with that, Neil.

Follow @pajiba

← Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Trailer | Robert Luketic Attached to "Romancing the Stone" →

Comments

Tyrion!

Posted by: Forbiddendonut at December 7, 2009 11:05 AM

Wow! I thought Death at a Funeral was absolutely awful. Clearly an attempt to turn Matthew McFaddeyn (sp?) into the next Hugh Grant coming off of his success in Pride & Prejudice. But it was really and truly not funny, not clever, and certainly not worthy of a remake.

Posted by: PaddyDog at December 7, 2009 11:13 AM

Too bad about Peter Dinklage - great actor, but taking the same part again? Dumb. Especially when I considered him to be a bright spot in the original. What's he going to prove?

I think the real shame is that the original was directed by Frank Oz who alternates between fantastic and just mediocre. But I don't know who would have been better considering the absurdity of the script.

Posted by: idiosynchronic at December 7, 2009 11:16 AM

Oh, Peter Dinklage! Do you really want to hurt me? Do you really want to see.me.cryyyy?

Posted by: Pinky McLadybits at December 7, 2009 11:16 AM

I liked the original a lot (I can't fucking believe I'm saying that about a movie that came out 2 years ago. It hurts). This looks like shit. Seriously the exact same movie, with black Americans instead of British people...and the actors play all the characters in the same way, at least based on this trailer. Fucking stupid.

Posted by: Woody at December 7, 2009 11:27 AM

Okay, so I situationally enjoyed the original (the situation being that I went with a friend going through a really hard time, and it was such a relief for her to turn off her brain and just laugh at something and I was grateful to the movie for that, and Alan Tudyk at least was ridiculously adorable and funny), but what the holy hell is the point of a remake? I saw the original in a medium-sized town, so the movie had a wide release in the US, correct? Were they thinking that it didn't do well because it's British, and we Americans just can't get behind those poncy accents? That it would be more palatable to Americans with American actors? I mean, what the fuck?

Posted by: Katers at December 7, 2009 11:30 AM

Good god, really? We're gonna fuck up another British import? Why don't we (American film makers that is) just gang-bang Helen Mirren and Ian McKellen and completely kill British films?

cuz then there won't be anything left to fuck up, that's why...

Posted by: dammitjanet at December 7, 2009 11:35 AM

ust gang-bang Helen Mirren and Ian McKellen

WHO TOLD YOU ABOUT THAT?!?!!?!!

Posted by: Smoking Crater (formerly Vermillion) at December 7, 2009 11:39 AM

Same film, bigger stars, louder punchlines.

Posted by: jim of the lower case at December 7, 2009 11:48 AM

Maybe Dinklage is performing an experiment. By playing the same role in both films, he's trying to gauge the differences between the directors' styles.

No? He just wants money?

Dayummmm.

You better be awesome as Tyrion, Dinklage, or I'm dipping you in hot resin and putting you in my garden. WITH A POINTY HAT.

Posted by: Snath at December 7, 2009 11:52 AM

I had to turn off Death At A Funeral halfway through because I just didn't find it amusing or entertaining. Basically, I stayed long enough to see Peter Dinklage's part, because I love Peter Dinklage. And really, who are you going to replace him with? The elf from Bad Santa?

Posted by: BWeaves at December 7, 2009 12:10 PM

I had forgotten this even existed, therefore I cannot be outraged by another remake.

Posted by: Carrie at December 7, 2009 12:27 PM

I really enjoyed the original Death At A Funeral. I love the actors in it, and I thought most of the scenes were quite funny (and British).

I was trying to keep an open mind with this trailer. I want movies to be good, you know? The second Chris Rock says, "You brought me Jackie Chan!" I was done.

Fuck this movie.

Posted by: Christian H. at December 7, 2009 12:32 PM

I should mention, because where else is this gonna come up, my girlfriend has a huge crush on Peter Dinklage. She thinks he's really sexy. Her words. "Really sexy."

How am I supposed to compete with that? I'm 6'4", for God's sake.

Posted by: Christian H. at December 7, 2009 12:38 PM

I actually really liked Death at a Funeral. I will admit that not everyone found it funny, but I think you had to understand British humor (and accents, obviously) to get it.

I think American studios need to accept that remaking The Office was a one-time success-it will not happen again and they should just stop trying to remake British shows/movies.

And lastly, WHY do people keep casting Tracey Jordan/Morgan in things? I love 30 Rock but watching him 'act' is the most painful thing in the world.

Posted by: Angela at December 7, 2009 12:40 PM

This makes no damn sense. No sense! I am having a day where I need things to make sense and this does not. Blast.

Posted by: The Wandering Parakeet at December 7, 2009 12:48 PM

@Angela: good point about the success of British to American version of "The Office" possibly being a catalyst for remaking this movie.
But not even James Marsden naked could get me to see this.
Also...Luke Wilson got puffy.

Posted by: Katie at December 7, 2009 2:23 PM

People keep remaking British stuff because there's a history of it working.

All in the Family, a remake of a British show called Till Death Do Us Part.

Sanford and Son, a remake of a British show called Steptoe and Son.

Three's Company was a remake of Man About The House.

And those are just the really old ones.

Posted by: BWeaves at December 7, 2009 2:40 PM

just gang-bang Helen Mirren and Ian McKellen

WHO TOLD YOU ABOUT THAT?!?!!?!!

Posted by: Smoking Crater (formerly Vermillion) at December 7, 2009 11:39 AM

AND WHY WASN'T I INVITED??????

Posted by: dammitjanet at December 7, 2009 2:41 PM

Hah! "Multiplex" had a comic strip on that today.

http://www.multiplexcomic.com/

Posted by: linny at December 7, 2009 3:18 PM

I'm with The Wandering Parakeet. No sense. No sense at all. Why are they trying to shit all over the fabulous British humor? I loved "Death at a Funeral" and this news hurts my brain.

Posted by: jessica at December 7, 2009 5:36 PM

Well, I suppose it could be worse. It could be directed by Tyler Perry. *shudder*
Is Hollywood so desperate for ideas that they can only wait 2 years before doing a remake?
I need a nap.

Posted by: trixie at December 7, 2009 5:51 PM

You know, this is all Chris Rock's fault.

Posted by: Daniel Hall at December 7, 2009 6:16 PM

Oh, James Marsden... between this and The Box, I just don't know what to think... I guess working with Rainbow Killer in 27 Dresses really put the whammy on you, huh?

Posted by: MelBivDevoe at December 7, 2009 6:40 PM

"Death at a Funeral" was not that good. If they remake it, I will not be insulted. Maybe the new one will actually be funny. But I doubt it.

Posted by: greer at December 7, 2009 6:51 PM

I liked the original. Modestly good, but pretty entertaining. Unless changing the race of the cast brings a new angle, I don't see the point of this. Especially when the trailer pretty much GAVE AWAY THE WHOLE MOVIE. Save some punchlines for later, people.

Posted by: Empress of All the Russias at December 8, 2009 12:07 AM

Christian, I too have a crush on Peter Dinklage even though I (possibly like your girlfriend) tend to go for men who are 6'4".

Consider him the exception that proves the rule. ;)

Posted by: embertine at December 8, 2009 5:09 AM

I don't think you can blame a dislike of the original on not understanding British humour and/or accents. I watch a lot of British comedy, and love it. I can't stop recommending Spaced and The Thick of It to everyone I know. I blame my dislike of Death at a Funeral on it not being a very good film.

And this? This is Frank Oz's Death at a Funeral, big bigger, broader, and fucking LOUDER.

Posted by: Simon A at December 8, 2009 7:18 AM

Pajiba

Pajiba: Reviews, Commentary, Angst

"Tea Can Do Many Things, But It Can't Bring Back the Dead"

Comments